Is the claim that courts the world over would be stymied by the supposedly novel concept of an intangible asset?
This doesn't work with banks outside a court's jurisdiction. That doesn't stop enforcement.
We already have tools that informally designate tainted versus untainted wallets. Incorporating that into the law wouldn't be that difficult nor, I suspect, controversial.
Enter the exchange control laws from the 60s that still limit capital flow out of SA.
1m ZAR per annum per person(~70k USD) this includes things like Netflix subscriptions, Amazon orders etc.
As you say, there was a delay, not a stoppage.
I suppose the issue will be getting you paycheck $$ from South Africa into Coinbase (or wherever)
If exchange control was applied fairly as was the interpretation up until recently, then staying below those amounts in ZAR terms would be fine. However, that may not be the case any more.